Author: "Portia Brown" at Internet
Date: 05/02/2000 3:24 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Portia Brown
Author: "Hairell; Jerry D." at Internet
Date: 05/02/2000 8:47 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I favor Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
Jerry D. Hairell
Systems Administrator
Georgia Pacific - Madison Ga.
(706) 342-4300
Author: "David Hasenmyer" at Internet
Date: 05/02/2000 1:21 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is proposing to change the rules
that currently allow companies to give important information to Wall Street
analysts without simultaneously giving the news to the public at large. Give the
news to the public at large through public access media. The public has a right
to be informed and make their own decisions.
David L. Hasenmyer
Houston, TX
Author: at Internet
Date: 05/02/2000 5:28 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Sirs/Madams:
I have read with interest the comments on this rule filed by the SIA.
Their arrogance is astounding. So is the fact that their self-interest
is so obviously apparent.
Although analysts do perform a market function, their coziness and
dependent relationship with the companies they cover has led to more than one
instance of coloring the facts.
It is clear that all investors should have access to the same information
at the same time, in the interest of fairness. The SIA comment to the effect
that analysts need to privately inquire into companies, in order to avoid
"tipping" other analysts to their thinking, is preposterous. That would be
akin to reporters claiming that they cannot ask appropriate questions at a
press conference to avoid losing a "scoop" to a competitor. It does not
therefor follow that press conferences should be eliminated.
In addition, the claim by the SIA that analysts make the market less
volatile based upon privately obtained information, in view of the recent
history of the markets, is also unavailing. Obviously, there are many
reasons why the markets are volatile at times. The existence of analysts
"back channels" for obtaining information
which companies wish to publish to a select few, does not mitigate against
this volatility.
There is nothing impeding analysts from analyzing a company from the same
information pool to which all investors should have simultaneous access. In
fact, simple fairness dictates that all investors be dealt with from the same
"deck", at the same time. The appropriateness of the proposed rule is
manifest.
Please promulgate it, intact, promptly.
Very truly yours,
John A. Herchenroder
156 Academy Pl.
West Hempstead, NY 11552
Author: RJM at Internet
Date: 05/02/2000 7:44 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Re: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
>
> Just as you see the benefit of getting comments over the WWW I see a
> benefit in all information from the companies I own being available to
> me at the same time as anyone else. Now that I think of it I would like
> to know first so I can decide what to do before my fellow shareholder
> hear the news
>
> Since not all stockholders are known to the Co's I would think along the
> lines of letting individuals sign up at co sites for email about co
> information. I would recommend that the information that the co's
> release to analysis is also e-mail to the list. Also a replay of the
> conference using the web audio tools would be possible. This could be
> live and available on demand would encourage brokers to set up master
> links for customers so the sign up could be done once at the brokers
> site.
>
> I would not require a company to have a web site or to maintain a
> mailing list or audio facilities. I would give them the option. I would
> require a press release as minimum disclosure and the release goes out
> within 24 hours of the release of information to the analysis if the
> information was verbal. If the information is in hard copy it goes out
> to the public at lease 4 hours before the analysis receive it.
>
> I do not benefit directly form analysis as I do my own research and
> their information is not released to the public. Therefore they should
> not have an edge on me in a free market system. An alternative would be
> that analysis have to release their information to the public at the
> same time it is released to their employer and clients if any
> information was obtained from sources not available to me (the public).
>
> Sounds like the analysis have a monopoly on information and the anti
> trust division should investigate. The government should not make rules
> that hinder my ability to compete in the open market.
>
Robert J. Melzer
Author: at Internet
Date: 05/02/2000 9:59 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
To the SEC:
The securities industry would have you believe that individual investors are
too ignorant to analyze company information by themselves, and need the
guidance of professional industry analysts. This is the crux of their
argument to protect the current rules which allow selective disclosure.
As a "dumb private investor" who has produced triple digit returns in each of
the last several years, I have been blindsided several times in the last year
by blatant examples of selective disclosure by some of the country's largest
corporations.
Do not be fooled by industry lackeys who wish to protect their jobs and would
very much like to see the current state of preferential treatment continue.
WE ALL HAVE MONEY AT RISK IN THE CAPITAL MARKETS. Therefore, we are all
entitled to the same information at precisely the same time from our publicly
held companies.
It's just that simple.
I implore you to take one of the few remaining steps required to level the
playing field:
BAN SELECTIVE DISCLOSURE.
very truly yours,
Mark P. Miller
Los Angeles, CA
private investor
Author: Thomas Stich at Internet
Date: 05/02/2000 1:21 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: "Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
------------------------------- Message Contents
"Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99"
Please change the rules that Wall Street analysts AND the public gets
information
simultaneously.
Thanks,
Thomas Stich (Thomas.Stich@worldnet.att.net or Thomas.Stich@st.com)
Author: at Internet
Date: 05/02/2000 7:47 AM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Proposed Regulation FD: File No. S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
Please enact full diclosure!
John Wagner
Author: Patsy Wilder at Internet
Date: 05/02/2000 4:32 PM
Normal
TO: RULE-COMMENTS at 03SEC
Subject: Propsed Regulation FD: File S7-31-99
------------------------------- Message Contents
I would like to encourage this committee to not shut out the small
investor. I have an account with a brokerage firm (full service) but
find that I love researching, looking into, and deciding what companies
I want to invest in. I still need my broker....but I can do more than
she can at times that she is not available to me. I feel that I have
the same rights to how businesses are doing as anyone else. Big money
is still in charge, so why take the rights and fun from everyone else.
Thanks for your time,
Patsy Wilder
